Magic Swords

[User3]

1175908367[/unixtime]]^ Ehhh some swords ARE sharper than others and the rules don't care, so it stands to reason that some frost swords are frostier than others and the rules won't care.

Fixed.

[Sma]

Scaling, with a minimum level of awesome for the better tier of weapons, gets my vote.

[Digestor]

1175909237[/unixtime]]

1175908367[/unixtime]]^ Ehhh some swords ARE sharper than others and the rules don't care, so it stands to reason that some frost swords are frostier than others and the rules won't care.

Fixed.

logistics and salamanders

;(

[TRQ]

Being one of the few so far to advocate static weapons, I feel duty bound to try to lay out my objection more clearly.
Yes, upgrading from a +6 frostie to a +7 frostie is lame. Whether you have +X frosties or minor/medium/major frosties or whatever method of describing the power of the frostie, is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion though.
Similarly, while I do in fact prefer low-magic campaigns as ringing truer to our cultural mythos, whether there's one frost brand or a factory producing frost brands is also pretty much irrelevant to the discussion.
The question is, which world would you rather be a sword-wielder in:
1) All weapons of a given type are the same. Your weapon and your cohort's weapon are interchangeable. People check their flame brands at the door and don't even bother to get the right one back when they leave. Unless artifact weapons are really prevalent, there's no reason to raid a royal armory because you'd get the same items from a 6th level party. People have funny guest-giving rituals where when you go to stay at someone's house, you switch frost brands. Because if the rules say that any two frost brands are the same for any person, then the society will behave as though any two frost brands are the same. And that leads to a pretty odd martial culture, if you ask me.
2) Sure there are a bajillion +5 flame swords lying around. But each one is theoretically a different entity. People won't just trade their +5 flame swords with each other... because swords are different, and his might actually be +4, and its rude to go around identifying everyone's weapons. Even if you did know he had the same exact bonuses from his weapon as yours provide, you wouldn't switch, because society thinks that's just weird. People care about their property, and martial classes are proud of the weapons they wield. The king has a cooler spear than his footman, you have better gear than your cohort, and the footman can be tempted by your better gear to kill you in your sleep and take YOUR flame brand. This is much more like the loving society we know, like all that we are familiar with.

On a random note, and this is curiousity and not a rebuttal of the scaling case, how is it planned for pricing to work for scaling items?

-TRQ

[Sma]

1) then the society will behave as though any two frost brands are the same. And that leads to a pretty odd martial culture, if you ask me.

Do you have weapon gift swaps in your game right now ? Do you exchange empty disks with your friends on a regular basis ?

But mainly, things can still be different even if they have the same stats.
The kings spear will still be cooler than the footmans due to being diamond encrusted, but the king will still be able to fight on a vaguely appropriate level if he happens to pick up the magical weapon he equips his footmen with.

[User3]

1175957975[/unixtime]]
1) All weapons of a given type are the same. Your weapon and your cohort's weapon are interchangeable. People check their flame brands at the door and don't even bother to get the right one back when they leave. Unless artifact weapons are really prevalent, there's no reason to raid a royal armory because you'd get the same items from a 6th level party. People have funny guest-giving rituals where when you go to stay at someone's house, you switch frost brands. Because if the rules say that any two frost brands are the same for any person, then the society will behave as though any two frost brands are the same. And that leads to a pretty odd martial culture, if you ask me.

Weapons are different because they have history. Yes, they're both Flame Brands, but Erik the Savage is wielding Darksnittr, the famous blade carried by Eorl the Elder when he killed the wyrm Blighting Breath. And Ionias is carrying the flame brand Vesuvius, forged by Hephaestus himself and given to Romulus to defeat the Northwind and prevent it from freezing Rome.

Two mechanically identical weapons, two very different histories, and two probably very different appearances. And both of them are always level appropriate.

[User3]

In fact, if you want warriors to attach sentimental value to their weapons and refuse to part with them, those weapons had better scale.

[Crissa]

Wow.

1) Can the guy who gets his magic from the sword co-exist with the guy who puts his magic on the sword?

The Red Mage always has a flaming sword - but that's because he sets each blade he uses afire before running into battle.

The Kid has the Flaming Sword of Antioch. It bursts into flame when entering battle.

Personally, I think magic swords should have a bonus that does not stack with BAB/level enhancement. The Kid has a magic sword because his enhancement bonus and BAB make it a magic sword. It doesn't work as well for his kid brother because his kid brother doesn't know how to bring out the features.

Swords should scale - but not by the creator, but from the owner. The creator should set the powers; flame 1 (1 per caster level), etc.

-Crissa

[Catharz]

1175908367[/unixtime]]^ Ehhh some swords ARE sharper than others, so it stands to reason that some frost swords are frostier than others.

I call bullshit. Every longsword deals 1d8 damage.

[Crissa]

1175908367[/unixtime]]^ Ehhh some swords ARE sharper than others, so it stands to reason that some frost swords are frostier than others.

But it doesn't matter how much sharper a sword is - it'll only be able to remain so in the right hands.

So the Kid with a magic sword has a pile of bonuses just like the warrior with a pile of bonuses - he just invests all his bonuses into magic sword.

The pile of bonuses doesn't matter. It's still just a number in the end with some irrelevent flavor attached.

-Crissa

[Digestor]

1175979825[/unixtime]]

1175908367[/unixtime]]^ Ehhh some swords ARE sharper than others, so it stands to reason that some frost swords are frostier than others.

I call bullshit. Every longsword deals 1d8 damage.

I meant in reality, I was playing the game of "realism" and like, stopped half way when I got the own pwnt-bag tossed at my face.

[PhoneLobster]

Before any else suggests the "growing with" option I'm going to step in and vote no.

I'm all for Yes on scaling with level.

I just do not like the variants of that mentioned like,
Scaling with level, but it has to be there on level up to level up with you.
Scaling with level, but you have to use it all the time to level it up.

Both of those are sorta annoying because that puts you into "one sword for your entire career" sorta territory. I prefer the, you pick it up and it scales to your level thing.

If you MUST require some use to get the best out of it then treat it like, or a bit like, your use it a tiny bit and figure it out weapon proficiencies stuff from races of war.

[RandomCasualty]

1175957975[/unixtime]] Because if the rules say that any two frost brands are the same for any person, then the society will behave as though any two frost brands are the same. And that leads to a pretty odd martial culture, if you ask me.

It'd look like the real world for the most part.

It wasn't like samurai went around swapping katanas or knights went around swapping long swords for the hell of it.

I'm not even sure why it's a big deal. For me it seems dumb for people to constantly be comparing which flame sword is hotter, or which sword is slightly sharper every time they kill a foe. So you get guys walking around with a golf bag of weapons for analysis, just in case the black knight's flame brand happened to be 5 degree's hotter than their own. That makes for a pretty odd martial culture if you ask me.

[Neeek]

1175985049[/unixtime]]
Both of those are sorta annoying because that puts you into "one sword for your entire career" sorta territory. I prefer the, you pick it up and it scales to your level thing.

Why?

The "one sword for your entire career" idea is pretty thematically appropriate to the setting.

Weapons in stories are nearly always one of the following:

1) Gift from parent/Birthright
2) Reforged after broken/super weapon found after original is broken.
3) Quest object
4) Normal weapon for early career, then a super weapon is found and used for the rest of career.

Stories where the hero constantly upgrades his weapons are pretty much unheard of, IME.

[the_taken]

It only happens in video games.

Think we're on to something?

[Crissa]

Can anyone give a good argument as to why we want a mechanic to allow the Kid to have the same size stack of bonuses at level 1 as the seasoned warrior at any other level?

Why should we have a sword that makes a character act like a higher level character?

Where's the incentive for a static bonus unrelated to wielder on a weapon?

-Crissa

[Neeek]

1175994059[/unixtime]]Can anyone give a good argument as to why we want a mechanic to allow the Kid to have the same size stack of bonuses at level 1 as the seasoned warrior at any other level?

It works well for the "artifact takes over innocent villager's mind and turns him into a warlord" story.

[Cielingcat]

Artifacts would have different mechanics, as always.

[Digestor]

1175994059[/unixtime]]Can anyone give a good argument as to why we want a mechanic to allow the Kid to have the same size stack of bonuses at level 1 as the seasoned warrior at any other level?

Why should we have a sword that makes a character act like a higher level character?

Where's the incentive for a static bonus unrelated to wielder on a weapon?

-Crissa

Because... of.... magic (see: Plot Device)?

[PhoneLobster]

Weapons in stories are nearly always one of the following:

1) Gift from parent/Birthright
2) Reforged after broken/super weapon found after original is broken.
3) Quest object
4) Normal weapon for early career, then a super weapon is found and used for the rest of career.

Only in the lamer stories.

Most of the good ones don't really make much of the weapons at all, people stab things with fairly annonymous swords when appropriate.

And the big time swashbucklers like Conan and his side kicks the Three Muskateers, Robin Hood, and his little buddy Hans Solo just stab you with weapons that they conveniently find each adventure, or just HAVE and nobody even talks about them, or take off your buddies body mid fight, or tear off an ornamental coat of arms on the wall etc...

That had better work as well as any other option in the system or its a failed system that pushes you towards juvenile archetypes from the lets say even pulpier end of pulp "action" fiction.

And anyway, if the swords scale with your level you CAN have the same one your whole career, its just if they scale with actual LEVEL UP instead then you sorta kinda get FORCED to have one for your entire career.

Suddenly EVERYONE is basically forced to be "the kid who's dad gave them an ancient sword" which sucks because I prefer the model where you have that archetype working along side the kid who just stabs you in the face with whatever he hasn't broken off to the hilt in the latest enemy yet.

Its a small difference but its the difference between a cool dude with a sword and a dude with a cool sword.

I just want it clear that I'm voting for the cool dudes rather than the magic item trust fund babies.

[Crissa]

1176012026[/unixtime]]I just want it clear that I'm voting for the cool dudes rather than the magic item trust fund babies.

And yet... You want to make a system in which there cannot be Kid with Sword. No Authurs for you!

But can anyone make a good argument for static bonuses from weapons? Or weapons that make a character act as a higher level?

Without the mechanic that there's already a character in the sword?

-Crissa

[Neeek]

1176012026[/unixtime]]

Most of the good ones don't really make much of the weapons at all, people stab things with fairly annonymous swords when appropriate.

And the big time swashbucklers like Conan and his side kicks the Three Muskateers, Robin Hood, and his little buddy Hans Solo

Uh...Neither Robin Hood nor the Three Musketeers have anything resembling magic. And some versions of Robin Hood *have* made a big deal of his weaponry, as it happens. My memory of 3M is foggy, but I think they did too. Conan I'm not familiar with the original, but the movie version made a big deal out of his sword (he got it from the hand of a dead king IIRC) and Han Solo had the most amazing piece of weaponry in the galaxy, the Millennium Falcon.

And anyway, if the swords scale with your level you CAN have the same one your whole career, its just if they scale with actual LEVEL UP instead then you sorta kinda get FORCED to have one for your entire career.

Not really. And even with you did, that makes a lot more sense than *not* doing it that way. The idea that a master swordsman doesn't fight better with his own blade than a random thing he just picked up is patently silly on the face of it.

Suddenly EVERYONE is basically forced to be "the kid who's dad gave them an ancient sword" which sucks because I prefer the model where you have that archetype working along side the kid who just stabs you in the face with whatever he hasn't broken off to the hilt in the latest enemy yet.

Your version doesn't work that way. At all. It says that every weapon is essentially the same. That's boring. There should be a pay-off for using the same weapon day in and day out. If you want to use a bag of weapons for every occasion, that's fine, you'll probably be better against some things that you can specialize against, but worse against the things you can't.

Its a small difference but its the difference between a cool dude with a sword and a dude with a cool sword.

No, that's the difference between "artifact-carrying commoner" and "ancestral weapon-carrying hero".

[RandomCasualty]

1176012026[/unixtime]]
And the big time swashbucklers like Conan and his side kicks the Three Muskateers, Robin Hood, and his little buddy Hans Solo just stab you with weapons that they conveniently find each adventure, or just HAVE and nobody even talks about them, or take off your buddies body mid fight, or tear off an ornamental coat of arms on the wall etc...

That had better work as well as any other option in the system or its a failed system that pushes you towards juvenile archetypes from the lets say even pulpier end of pulp "action" fiction.

You're not going to be able to do this without rewriting a lot of stuff.

I mean basically you want D&D to turn into an item-less game. That's difficult, given that swag is like a fundamental feature of the game. Stripping it out won't be easy.

And as far as magic items go, I can kind of live with the magic swords and armor. It just sort of gets annoying with all the D&D accessories in my opinion. I mean.. magic boots, magic rings, magic amulets, magic cloaks, magic belts, magic bracers.

Yeah, we don't particularly like that... but there isn't much that can be done about it. Not without a complete rewrite of the entire rules set, including the monster manual.

[PhoneLobster]

Conan I'm not familiar with the original, but the movie version made a big deal out of his sword

Conan made a big deal out of "good steel" his sword in the movie was just "good steel" that he just found at the begining of the adventure as required.

I'm pretty sure in the books (as long ago as it was that I read some of them) I remember him running around with axes and other junk. And in the second movie when he fights a GOD he just like wrestles it then stabs it with its own broken off horn.

Conan stories made a much bigger deal of all the women he slept with than the weapons he used.

And frankly if you want freudian fantasy I'm much happier with that than the named phallic substitute recieved from your father and gloated over for the ENTIRE saga.

The versions of robin hood that made a big deal of his weaponry were A) the wanky ones and B) often is just ripping off the whole ulysses thing, which originally was really more about how strong the hero was than anything especially fantasmic about the bow.

The good versions of Robin hood, like every swashbuckling fight ever have fights that start with tearing swords straight off the wall or whacking people with a dead stag.

And the Millenium Falcon wasn't a weapon, it was a set for scenes in between the ones that mattered, (and thats generally what it is in any RPG version of the same story as well). Or do you put D&D PCs on a boat and say "there, you know your new weapon? You're standing on it."

In the mean time Hans had his side arm, storm trooper blasters, whatever he may have grabbed in the whole jabba bit (did he shoot anything after being defrosted, its been a while?)

It says that every weapon is essentially the same. That's boring. There should be a pay-off for using the same weapon day in and day out.

There damn well should be mechanical equality between weapon options and ESPECIALLY between archetypes of weapon use.

Suggesting someone should be BETTER for adopting a specific archetype of weapon use is bad. Because someone like me looks at it HATES authurian myth and wants make a cooler PC who grabs swashbuckling gear off the wall instead.

And they get punished, which is STUPID, Frank's original option of just scaling with character level is far superior and doesn't punish either option.

You don't get punished for being boring old Elric and I don't get punished for being Errol Flynn.

Everyone's archetype gets equal game power and everyones happy, if you tell Errol he has to suck because he keeps swapping stuff around everytime he breaks out of the kings dungeon then you are making a mistake.

I mean basically you want D&D to turn into an item-less game. That's difficult, given that swag is like a fundamental feature of the game. Stripping it out won't be easy.

No, right now I'm just voting that you shouldn't have to keep your items around so they can gain experience points along with you and level up.

Itemlessness or item reduction would be nice in a lot of ways, but this thread asked a simple question about magic swords and I say ones that just scale based on who uses them are the rocking hot option and diddling that with loyalty frequent flier points schemes is a bad idea.

And yet... You want to make a system in which there cannot be Kid with Sword. No Authurs for you!

Maybe its not clear what I'm saying.

Weapons should scale with character level. Which I thought was one of the original options.

From when you pick them up to when you put them down.

You shouldn't have to acrue career long flight time for them to start to scale.

Excalibur scales with level, but if Authur dumps it along with that dozy old wizard Merlin and picks up Stormbringer instead then IT also scales with his level immediately and he doesn't suck for swapping them out after he kills Elric.

[CalibronXXX]

The problem with that, Phone Lobster, is that grabbing a showpiece off of a coat of arms is not a magic sword. As far as I can tell you want a character to be equally competent with the rusted pig-iron long sword you grabbed after busting yourself out of the king's dungeon and a Sun Blade. That just doesn't make any sense.